FOR SOME observers, Paul Bremer's early handover of power to an interim Iraqi administration, followed by his sudden and hasty departure, must have been rich in symbolism. Here were the Americans, quickly swearing in the government and engaging in subterfuge to avoid detection by their enemies, then washing their hands of Iraq as fast as possible.
Of course, there is more to it than that. The Americans remain very much present in Iraq. Their soldiers are under US command, and much of the country's reconstruction is being handled directly by the American government.
Nevertheless, the Bush administration is keen to get out of Iraq, symbolically if not actually. The question now is whether the handover will improve or worsen things for it. On one hand, the Americans can relinquish the unattractive position of being a foreign occupier, and let somebody else take the blame for Iraq's state. On the other, they will continue to do much of the dirty work for the government, but will not have as much control over its direction. Indeed, the new Iraqi administration is already hinting that the elections scheduled to take place next January may have to be postponed. This would expose as hollow, the Bush administration's stated commitment to the democratisation of Iraq.
Meanwhile with characteristic aplomb, US President George Bush told the NATO summit in Istanbul, Turkey yesterday that the Iraqi people had got back their country. The questions remain: Which Iraqis and in what kind of country?
The slate of problems is staggering. The economy is in a mess, unemployment is high, the infrastructure is in a mess and the threat of further insurgency attacks remains. Bush administration officials are pushing the line that any attacks against the new regime should be seen as Iraqi versus Iraqi violence. That, of course, is only partially true. Since the new regime is a US-approved one, there is little distinction to be made between them and the previous one, not only in the minds of ordinary Iraqis but in the minds of the insurgents as well. As some analysts have noted, to Iraqis, members of the new regime may have independent thought, but not independent action. In reality, little has changed.
As part of the restoration to normality in Iraq, the U.S. should seek to draw on the cooperation of those countries which have demonstrated an interest in the rebuilding effort. The defiant and headlong push to occupy Iraq in furtherance of narrow geo-political interests, has proven, to date, to be an unqualified diplomatic failure. There is still opportunity to make amends.
THE OPINIONS ON THIS PAGE, EXCEPT FOR THE ABOVE, DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF THE GLEANER.
